Average....

[Shev]

Looking at the universe for alliance ranks at the moment is pretty damn decieving.

Rank
1 Wolfpack
2 Howling Rain
3 LCH
4 EXilition
5 1up
6 NewDawn
7 NoS
8 Vengeance
9 Angels
10 Tides of Fire

Average Score Rank
1 EXilition
2 Angels
3 Wolfpack
4 1up
5 LCH
6 HR
7 ND
8 NoS
9 ToF
10 Vengeance

Average Size Rank
1 EXilition
2 Angels
3 LCH
4 HR
5 Wolfpack
6 1up
7 ND
8 NoS
9 ToF
10 Vengeance

[Seth Mace]

I wonder if this thread could lead onto the first bits of R13 Propaganda?

[Gate]

12 ToT 12303 47 190,233 8,940,953

They can go in at fourth?
Though in general, the averages tend to pan out nicely over the round, at the start, numbers obviously pay a far greater role than quality, hence why Angels, 1up, EXilition were all outside T5. I think we'll see the gaps largen a bit as we usually do.

[TheRat]

Originally Posted by Seth Mace

I wonder if this thread could lead onto the first bits of R13 Propaganda?

<propaganda> Im winning </propaganda>

Bah, dropped a breadcrumb under my spacebar

[NitinA]

According to the logic of Shev, If the #1 planet in the universe quit his alliance and formed his own tag, then he'd be winning for #1 planet and #1 alliance! Sorry Shev, it doesn't work that way. *Score* is the basis for alliance measurement, and you even partially concede that when you fail to include anyone out of the top 10. Though I must agree with Gate, throughout the course of a round the numbers do tend to work out to player skill.

-NitinA

[Banned]

Originally Posted by NitinA

According to the logic of Shev, If the #1 planet in the universe quit his alliance and formed his own tag, then he'd be winning for #1 planet and #1 alliance!

But he didn't claim that. He just said that the current situation was deceiving.

[Helix]

<propaganda> I say it is about time everyone on AD bands together and goes to war with TheRat </propaganda>

[Kjeldoran]

Originally Posted by NitinA

According to the logic of Shev, If the #1 planet in the universe quit his alliance and formed his own tag, then he'd be winning for #1 planet and #1 alliance! Sorry Shev, it doesn't work that way. *Score* is the basis for alliance measurement, and you even partially concede that when you fail to include anyone out of the top 10. Though I must agree with Gate, throughout the course of a round the numbers do tend to work out to player skill.

-NitinA

Score is what measures the alliance strength, averages is what measures how efficient and effective it really is. so yes, averages mean something if not using extremes (like #1 player starting his own solo alliance).

[Shev]

Originally Posted by NitinA

According to the logic of Shev, If the #1 planet in the universe quit his alliance and formed his own tag, then he'd be winning for #1 planet and #1 alliance! Sorry Shev, it doesn't work that way. *Score* is the basis for alliance measurement, and you even partially concede that when you fail to include anyone out of the top 10. Though I must agree with Gate, throughout the course of a round the numbers do tend to work out to player skill.

-NitinA

Gain a clue, imbecile. I wasn't getting at WP in the slightest. Actually, I think you're doing extremely well compared to past rounds - maybe one day you'll live up to the name. (Yes, that one was a slight dig - in case you're having trouble differentiating)

Actually, it was an attempt to start a discussion more than anything else - AD seems almost dead these days. A winning alliance is of course decided by total score - that doesn't give any indication of how well alliance's induvidual members are performing. It's not really a surprise to Exilition and Angels up there, given the player bases, but seeing WP ahead of 1up in both average roids and score i'm sure you would admit is a surprise to even the most biased of WP members. I've no doubt though that 1up will in time storm into a better position, even with the targetting they are bound to recieve.

[Chika]

AD is dead sir.

[Bashar]

Originally Posted by Chika

AD is dead sir.

Doesn't seem that way to me. There are several active threads going, and there is discussion involved. It isn't what it used to be, I'll grant you that, but it isn't dead, just semi-consciouss.

[NitinA]

Originally Posted by Banned

But he didn't claim that. He just said that the current situation was deceiving.

Very much so true. I guess I stuck words in his mouth. My question, therefore, becomes in what way do you (Shev) beleieve that the universe for alliance ranks are deciving? I don't see how they *can* be deceiving, as they are quantative. How do you suggest the alliance rankings more accurate than these, if they are deciving?

Originally Posted by Kjeldoran

Score is what measures the alliance strength, averages is what measures how efficient and effective it really is. so yes, averages mean something if not using extremes (like #1 player starting his own solo alliance).

I never disagreed. Where exactly did I make the claim that average doesn't mean anything? Rather, my point was that ranking alliances strictly by average score is *also* deceiving. But unlike Shev, I did give an example to justify my claim.

Originally Posted by Shev

Gain a clue, imbecile.

That wasn't very nice

Originally Posted by Shev

I wasn't getting at WP in the slightest. Actually, I think you're doing extremely well compared to past rounds

Thank you for the compliment. I never mentioned my alliance, Wolfpack, anywhere in the post I made? This has been said a million times on AD, by various people in various allliances, but I'll repeat it : Just because I'm in the alliance, doesn't mean that I'm speaking for the entire alliance. My account is registered to *me* not to my alliance.

Originally Posted by Shev

maybe one day you'll live up to the name. (Yes, that one was a slight dig - in case you're having trouble differentiating)

That wasn't very nice Mabye you should try to address my point(s) instead of just trying to make digs at myself and my alliance. I am more intrested in what you have to say, rather than your jokes.

Originally Posted by Shev

Actually, it was an attempt to start a discussion more than anything else - AD seems almost dead these days. A winning alliance is of course decided by total score - that doesn't give any indication of how well alliance's induvidual members are performing. It's not really a surprise to Exilition and Angels up there, given the player bases, but seeing WP ahead of 1up in both average roids and score i'm sure you would admit is a surprise to even the most biased of WP members.

Wolfpack underwent some heavy changes during our mid-round break. I was, honestly, expecting Wolfpack to be at about #2, but our performance this far is quite pleasing.

Originally Posted by Shev

I've no doubt though that 1up will in time storm into a better position, even with the targetting they are bound to recieve.

I agree. I think they will move up in ranks as well.
--

My point still remains : Though the alliance rankings *may* be deciving, ranking alliances by average size and average score is *also* just as deciving, if not moreso.

-NitinA

[Chika]

Originally Posted by Bashar

Doesn't seem that way to me. There are several active threads going, and there is discussion involved. It isn't what it used to be, I'll grant you that, but it isn't dead, just semi-consciouss.

My comment was based on the fact that it all goes in circles. If you check back to early threads from last round, you will find one similar to this one. With the same names besides exilition.
Maybe I'm crazy, but generally topics tend to lose appeal after being repeated 4 or 5 times.

To be on topic, Wp's average score is a bit leet conidering they have 99 members.

[Shev]

Originally Posted by NitinA

Very much so true. I guess I stuck words in his mouth. My question, therefore, becomes in what way do you (Shev) beleieve that the universe for alliance ranks are deciving? I don't see how they *can* be deceiving, as they are quantative. How do you suggest the alliance rankings more accurate than these, if they are deciving?

If a new player looks at the alliance rankings, he could be forgiven for assuming the top scoring alliances had the highest induvidual scores as well. A little more analysis - not hard to carry out - shows that alliances such as Angels and Ex have higher induvidual scores and roids.

I never disagreed. Where exactly did I make the claim that average doesn't mean anything? Rather, my point was that ranking alliances strictly by average score is *also* deceiving. But unlike Shev, I did give an example to justify my claim.

Right here is where you disagreed.

Sorry Shev, it doesn't work that way.

You're right in your second post however, they both decieve depending on what you're looking at.

Thank you for the compliment. I never mentioned my alliance, Wolfpack, anywhere in the post I made? This has been said a million times on AD, by various people in various allliances, but I'll repeat it : Just because I'm in the alliance, doesn't mean that I'm speaking for the entire alliance. My account is registered to *me* not to my alliance.

And once again, the same answer will be given. Your signature is part of the post you made. If you don't want people to assume everything you say is based on a view of the universe from within Wolfpack - notice I don't say "speaking for" - then don't attach your signature to your post.

Once again, there's a big difference between people assuming you look at the world from a Wolfpack point of view, and people thinking you speak for the rest of Wolfpack.

That wasn't very nice Mabye you should try to address my point(s) instead of just trying to make digs at myself and my alliance. I am more intrested in what you have to say, rather than your jokes.

As opposed to the snide asides you put into your own posts about me? Give and take my friend, give and take.

Wolfpack underwent some heavy changes during our mid-round break. I was, honestly, expecting Wolfpack to be at about #2, but our performance this far is quite pleasing.

It's nice to see it. More competition for top places = more fun for eveyone really.

[Shev]

Originally Posted by Chika

My comment was based on the fact that it all goes in circles. If you check back to early threads from last round, you will find one similar to this one. With the same names besides exilition.
Maybe I'm crazy, but generally topics tend to lose appeal after being repeated 4 or 5 times.

To be on topic, Wp's average score is a bit leet conidering they have 99 members.

Both true, but I'm bored. Sue me.

[Kargool]

Aww. How nice, another : Lets flame the leading alliance thread.

[Banned]

Originally Posted by Kargool

Aww. How nice, another : Lets flame the leading alliance thread.

Wait, I'm confused. Are we flaming WP or EX?

[Kargool]

WP and 1up should just powerblock and get this round over with :-P

[TheRat]

Originally Posted by Banned

Wait, I'm confused. Are we flaming WP or EX?

Both?

[mens]

we haven't even played one week.
too early to start this sheit.

[Seth Mace]

If ive learnt one thing over my time in PA, is that it's never too early for AD

[Banned]

Originally Posted by Seth Mace

If ive learnt one thing over my time in PA, is that it's never too early for AD

An AD a day keeps the boredom away!

[demiGOD]

Xil is the new "scary people" of R13

[Proxi]

its ok to be scared

[noah02]

oooh look exiliation has more terrans than everyone else :P

[Tomkat]

It's too early to see what's happening yet. We all hope for decent targets, high capping and a bit of luck. Until the luck aspect is less important, and the leaders start to pull away, the rankings are almost irrelevant.

[noah02]

i know exil have had the highest avg since start which could point at the fact they might have an alliance full of terrans as they hoarde score at the begining.